INDIAN NATIONAL CONG. (I) AICC vs. C.I.T.- XI

Section 57(iii) of the Act and this cannot be granted since the INC did not place on record the factual basis for such a claim. 124. The legal position is that no deduction can be allowed with respect to the expenditure incurred by the political party for any purpose whatsoever if it fails to comply with the basic requirements

PATANJALI YOGPEETH (NYAS),DELHI vs. ADIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L. P. Sahu

section 142(2A) while confirming the order of the Assessing Officer in denying exemption under sections 11/12 of the Act. 8.2 The ld. AR on queries raised by the Bench responded that assessee trust is not running shops or distribution of products and for those shoppings and distribution and selling of products, as on commercial basis different entity is there

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal No. 2424/Del/ 2015 filed by the revenue in assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) is to be deleted. 14.96. It would be pertinent to point that section 194C was amended by the Finance (2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 1.10.2009, whereby the definition of “work” was enlarged to include contract for manufacturing or supplying a product according to the requirement or specification of a customer by using material purchased from

VEDANTA LTD (SUCCESSOR TO CAIRN INDIA LTD),GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-26(1), NEW DELHI

Bench: Hon’Ble, Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

2) is to be made without resorting to the computation as contemplated u/s 14A read with Rule 8D of the Income tax Rules 1962. Respectfully following the Special Bench decision, we hold that no separate disallowance should be made under section 14A in the computation of book profits under section 115JB of the Act. The impugned order is set aside

VEDANTA LTD ,GURGAON vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 26(2), NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[Assessment Year: 2014-15]

24. Before the lower authorities, the ld. counsel for the assessee explained that it incurs the maintenance cost for SAP accounting system used by Vedanta group entities. The relevant extracts of Agreement between Appellant and third party service provider were furnished. The TPO was of the opinion that this transaction is akin to IT enabled services and, therefore, the assessee

CIT vs. ESCORTS HEART INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and those

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

IIA COI^ ESH TFIEHAN i 'i :398/2009 MISSI'ONER O VERSUS VERSUS \/ERSUS IlMGpMETAX VERSUS ESC'CRTS Heart iNsTiijuTE and EARCK centre LTp. 48472009 R PC; (16) m COMMISSIONER OF Ih CqME TAX; i, VERSUS . MSTITUTE AND ESCORTS ;HEART I RESEARCijI CENTRE LTD. ^ (17) ITA 1918/2010 CIT M r . . Appellant .Respondent, . . Appellant .Respondent . . . Appellant ,.Respondent . . . Appellant .Respondent . . . Appellant .Respondent Appe

CIT vs. ESCORTS HEART INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and those

IIA COI^ ESH TFIEHAN i 'i :398/2009 MISSI'ONER O VERSUS VERSUS \/ERSUS IlMGpMETAX VERSUS ESC'CRTS Heart iNsTiijuTE and EARCK centre LTp. 48472009 R PC; (16) m COMMISSIONER OF Ih CqME TAX; i, VERSUS . MSTITUTE AND ESCORTS ;HEART I RESEARCijI CENTRE LTD. ^ (17) ITA 1918/2010 CIT . . Appellant .Respondent, . . Appellant .Respondent . . . Appellant ,.Respondent . . . Appellant .Respondent . . . Appellant .Respondent Appe lant

THE MANTOLA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-62(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 4078/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6935/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 2036/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 The Mantola Cooperative Vs Income Tax Officer, Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., Ward-62(5), 541, Mantola, Phar Ganj, New Delhi New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaajt1976A Assessee By : Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2020

disallowing this deduction in respect of the interest earned from bank deposits. While doing so, the AO relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Co- operative Sale Society Ltd. vs. ITO [2010] 188 taxman 282 . ITA Nos. 2036 & 4078/Del/2019 6 Mantola Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. 8. The ld. CIT (A) confirmed

THE MANTOLA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-62(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 4078/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6935/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 2036/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 The Mantola Cooperative Vs Income Tax Officer, Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., Ward-62(5), 541, Mantola, Phar Ganj, New Delhi New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaajt1976A Assessee By : Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2020

disallowing this deduction in respect of the interest earned from bank deposits. While doing so, the AO relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Co- operative Sale Society Ltd. vs. ITO [2010] 188 taxman 282 . ITA Nos. 2036 & 4078/Del/2019 6 Mantola Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. 8. The ld. CIT (A) confirmed

MANTOLA COOPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-62(5), NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 4078/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ita No. 6935/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Ita No. 2036/Del/2019 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 The Mantola Cooperative Vs Income Tax Officer, Thrift & Credit Society Ltd., Ward-62(5), 541, Mantola, Phar Ganj, New Delhi New Delhi-110055 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaajt1976A Assessee By : Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 22.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2020

disallowing this deduction in respect of the interest earned from bank deposits. While doing so, the AO relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Totgars Co- operative Sale Society Ltd. vs. ITO [2010] 188 taxman 282 . ITA Nos. 2036 & 4078/Del/2019 6 Mantola Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society Ltd. 8. The ld. CIT (A) confirmed

M/S. HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

iia) of the Act. As regards the condition of increase in installed capacity, we have seen the facts and there is no dispute by the AO/Ld. CIT (A) as well on the increase in installed capacity of assessee. The same is certified by auditors and also reported in notes to audited accounts reproduced supra. In view of the above

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HERO HONDA MOTORS LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2005-06

iia) of the Act. As regards the condition of increase in installed capacity, we have seen the facts and there is no dispute by the AO/Ld. CIT (A) as well on the increase in installed capacity of assessee. The same is certified by auditors and also reported in notes to audited accounts reproduced supra. In view of the above

HERO MOTOCORP LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms Suchitra Kamble

2)(b) of the Act. 21. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in disallowing expenditure of Rs. 22,84,20,063/- incurred towards quarterly target/turnover discount and trade discount of Rs. 31,51,28,137/- given to the dealers/customers under section 40(a)(ia) on the ground that the appellant failed to deducted tax at source

HERO MOTOCORP LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Sh. I. C. Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishihero Motocorp Limited, Jcit, 34, Basant Lok, Vasant Range-1, New Delhi Vs. Vihar, New Delhi Pan: Aaach0812J (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community Vs. New Delhi Centre, Basant Lok, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057 (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, M/S. Hero Moto Corp. Circle-11(1), Ltd., 34, Community

iia) of the Act, in respect of computers installed at supervisory offices located in the compound of factory at Gurgaon / Dharuhera / Haridwar plant, on the ground, that in terms of proviso to said section Hero MotoCorp Limited Vs. JCIT & DCIT Vs. Hero MotoCorp Ltd. ITA Nos. 1545/Del/2015 and 2424/Del/2015 (AY 2010-11) ITA No. 1609/Del/2016 and 914/Del/2016

ACIT, CIRCLE- 17(2), , NEW DELHI vs. NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

2,59,00,000/- on account of demurrage and wharfage charges by ignoring the provision of the Railway Act, 1989 and Explanation 1 to Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “ the Act”)? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) is legally justified in deleting the disallowance

NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 17(2), , NEW DELHI

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

2,59,00,000/- on account of demurrage and wharfage charges by ignoring the provision of the Railway Act, 1989 and Explanation 1 to Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “ the Act”)? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) is legally justified in deleting the disallowance

ACIT, CIRCLE- 17(2), , NEW DELHI vs. NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

2,59,00,000/- on account of demurrage and wharfage charges by ignoring the provision of the Railway Act, 1989 and Explanation 1 to Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “ the Act”)? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) is legally justified in deleting the disallowance

NATIONAL FERTILIZERS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 17(2), , NEW DELHI

Appeal are dismissed

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

2,59,00,000/- on account of demurrage and wharfage charges by ignoring the provision of the Railway Act, 1989 and Explanation 1 to Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “ the Act”)? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) is legally justified in deleting the disallowance